Talk:Theological differences between the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church

Merger proposal
Proposing merge: Ecclesiastical differences between the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church + Theological differences between the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church = Differences between the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church. What could be considered encyclopedically relevant, we should be able to confine in one single article. Better overview, easier maintainance, and naturally are the two now divided subjects much related, why a merge is simply logical and natural. Chicbyaccident (talk) 21:06, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Opinions

 * Strongly Oppose. LoveMonkey (talk) 12:49, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose - keeping them separate may be more clear.  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   04:07, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Romanides
Why is this article rated B-class? It presents mainly the views of one contemporary theologian, John Romanides, appended with information which fits into this story. Which does not make for a good article, that is, readable, informative, and presenting an overview of all the relevant pov's. The main contents can be summarized with these few lines from John Romanides:

In comparison, the section "Extant disputes as seen by Catholic theologians" is a fraction of the section Orthodox views, and starts with the statement "The Catholic Church considers that the differences between Eastern and Western theology are complementary rather than contradictory." So, does this article really represent the actual theological differences between East and West, or does it give WP:UNDUE weight to one specific view? Joshua Jonathan  -  Let's talk!   13:50, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

For a further comparison: this article is 109,588K, while Eastern Orthodox Christian theology is only 67,507K. Are the differences more important than the actual theology? It gives the impression that fighting the enemy and carfting an identity is more important than embodying the Christian message of "love thy neigbor"...  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   14:03, 19 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Romanides was the Greek Orthodox representative to the World Council of Churches. His position is not one like in Western Christianity that one person reads the bible and then that interpretation is "their interpretation". Romanides was selected by the Greek Church and was then confirmed as a scholastic credentialed (from Yale) theologian. Also there are quite a few theologians mentioned and sourced in this article. LoveMonkey (talk) 14:54, 19 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Here is a list of some but not all of the Orthodox theologians used in this article. Hierotheos Vlachos, Vladimir Lossky, Simeon The New Thelogian, Gregory Of Nyssa, Gregory Palamas, John Meyendorff, Georges Florovsky, Sergei Bulgakov, Dumitru Stăniloae, George Metallinos, Michael Pomazansky LoveMonkey (talk) 15:15, 19 June 2017 (UTC)


 * And finally that Orthodox article you mention is quite obviously just about Orthodoxy this article is Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism so why would it not be a longer article? LoveMonkey (talk) 15:42, 19 June 2017 (UTC)


 * If you would like allot of these points can be sourced from the Greek Philosopher and Professor Christos Yannaras but he did not get appointed to represent the Orthodox Church when in council with other Christian sects. Were as Romanides did. LoveMonkey (talk) 15:38, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Since in Orthodoxy, theology is validated by ascetic practice not academic credentialing. In the Orthodox community Yannaras is treated as an academic. Romandies was an academic (again his degree from Harvard) and monastic practicing member of clergy. So the endorsement of him by clergy like Hierotheos Vlachos has that meaning. LoveMonkey (talk) 15:48, 19 June 2017 (UTC)


 * I understand that Romanides is a major voice in contemporary (Greek?) Orthodox thought; yet, to have an article on theological differences that mainly highlights Romanides views is quite one-sided, to say the least. Also, the section on Orthodox views is not really an easy read; a lot of repetition, and obscurations. I think that the main points can be presented in a more concise way.  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   17:19, 19 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Romanides is not a voice he is a representative whose job it was to convey these things and why are you ignoring that I have listed a whole group of theologians? LoveMonkey (talk) 17:52, 19 June 2017 (UTC)


 * So, are they representing different pov's?  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   18:31, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Joshua Jonathan wrote:

I was addressing that question. Orthodox theology is dogmatic so they agree. So why are you attributing the theology as "mainly the views of one contemporary theologian" and then asking if they are different? They all are trained in and teach the same theology. LoveMonkey (talk) 18:49, 19 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Well, because your contributions echo the stance of Romanides, which is a fairly present pov, with a fairly distinctive emphasis on just a few points. Is there nothing else to report about Orthodox Christianity? And if these are the only points to mention (Hesychasm), it can be summarized in a much shorter way. But just consider this: do you define your own religion by what's wrong with another religion?...  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   05:17, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

B-class
So, the article was promoted to B-class with this edit. I'll re-assess it; it won't be better than C-class. Joshua Jonathan  -  Let's talk!   05:49, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Yep, C-class. Incomplete, and in need of clean-up, to give a more concise overview of the importance of hesychasm in the Orthodoc Churches. NB: this is in line with the Good Article assessment.  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   05:52, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Neo-Palamism
Neo-Palamism, that's the term. See, for example: Joshua Jonathan  -  Let's talk!   09:41, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Partakers of the Divine Nature, p.233.
 * Metropolitan Hierotheos Vlachos, “Palamite” and “Neo-Palamite” Theology
 * Adrian Agachi, The Neo-Palamite Synthesis of Father Dumitru Stăniloae, Cambridge Scholars Publishing.


 * See also History of Eastern Orthodox theology in the 20th century.  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   07:36, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Subsection "Philosophy and scholasticism versus Theoria"
I've changed

into

The reasons: Joshua Jonathan  -  Let's talk!   18:20, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * "Christianity is the truth; that Christianity is in essence the one true way to know the true God who is the origin and originator of all things (seen and unseen, knowable and unknowable)" - I've removed this sentence; it may make sense to an Orthodox Christian,but for an outsider it's hardly understandable.
 * "considers philosophy but one form or tool that can do much to bring one closer to God, but falls short at completeness in this task." - I've moved this sentence upward, and emrged with the remainder of the first sentence.
 * This is at least two different things as there was a set of Councils in the East (not in the West nor acknowledged by the West), in Byzantium called the Hesychast councils on if Christianity has Orthodox gnosiology in it at all or if it is a logical system of thought (true philosophy). Palamas says people are supposed to have mystical knowledge and see God (i.e. have theoria) in order to believe in a God and Barlaam said people can not experience God or the supernatural in this life and must instead redeem themselves and have their knowledge of God be validated by reason. LoveMonkey (talk) 18:57, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * So, condensed in a few lines. Clear, thanks.  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   05:18, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Subsection "Hesychasm controversy and the acquisition of Theoria"
I've changed

into

because the second source says

Joshua Jonathan  -  Let's talk!   18:29, 19 June 2017 (UTC)


 * It is more than this way that you have posted it. The East as tradition states that people whom live a monastic life style and pray in order to experience God are the East's theologians; prayer and asceticism are the first major qualification. The West teaches that people whom have degrees from Universities are the people whom can teach knowledge of God, so the people in the West have their knowledge of God from reading books from other people whom may or may not have been theologians with theoria. LoveMonkey (talk) 19:05, 19 June 2017 (UTC)


 * As far as I know, contemplative practice is still part of the Catholic church. Are you sure you, or the Orthodox theologians, know enough about the western churches? In Holland, priests are educated by the Church, not by universities. NB: the source also says that the Hesychast-controversy was instrumental in the further development of the Orthodox Churches, placing more emphasis on contemplative practices, and widening the gap between east and west. That's definitely relevant, and has to be mentioned. But in a more concise manner, and maybe with a little bit less influence from Romanides in the tone. Less polemical, more neutral. Hesychasm is valuable in and of itself; it's a pity if the emphasis is on a 'self-defense by attack', instead on a more neutral overview. Do you understand (feel, so to speak), what I mean? Best regards,   Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   05:40, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Re-ordering the info per topic
I'm re-ordering the info per topic. i will also shorten the huge section on hesychasm and theoria. Joshua Jonathan  -  Let's talk!   18:14, 20 June 2017 (UTC)